OCPBUGS-82584: Add labelSelector to MachineSet status for scale subresource by RadekManak · Pull Request #2807 · openshift/api

RadekManak · 2026-04-16T10:18:23Z

Summary

MachineSet already advertises a scale subresource with labelSelectorPath: .status.labelSelector, but the API/schema does not define that status field.

adds status.labelSelector to machine.openshift.io/v1beta1 MachineSetStatus

The paired openshift/machine-api-operator#1490 change populates status.labelSelector from spec.selector during MachineSet status reconciliation so the /scale subresource can expose Scale.status.selector for HPA/KEDA-style consumers.

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-04-16T10:18:25Z

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: LGTM mode

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-04-16T10:18:29Z

@RadekManak: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-82584, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "5.0.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

Summary

MachineSet already advertises a scale subresource with labelSelectorPath: .status.labelSelector, but the API/schema does not define that status field.

adds status.labelSelector to machine.openshift.io/v1beta1 MachineSetStatus

The paired openshift/machine-api-operator#1490 change populates status.labelSelector from spec.selector during MachineSet status reconciliation so the /scale subresource can expose Scale.status.selector for HPA/KEDA-style consumers.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci · 2026-04-16T10:18:32Z

Hello @RadekManak! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

coderabbitai · 2026-04-16T10:18:38Z

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

@coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

▶️ Resume reviews
🔍 Trigger review

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

An optional LabelSelector field (type string) was added to MachineSetStatus in machine/v1beta1/types_machineset.go (JSON: labelSelector,omitempty, validation: MinLength=0, MaxLength=4096). It represents the serialized label selector for the MachineSet's machines and is exposed via the scale subresource as status.selector. The field remains unset until the controller reconciles spec.selector into status.labelSelector. No other spec or status fields or control-flow logic were changed.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 9 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Test Structure And Quality	❓ Inconclusive	PR appears to contain only schema field additions to MachineSetStatus type with no Ginkgo test code modifications identified.	Clarify if PR includes any Ginkgo test code changes requiring custom check review for test quality standards.

✅ Passed checks (9 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: adding a labelSelector field to MachineSet status for the scale subresource, matching the changeset.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is directly related to the changeset, explaining why the labelSelector field is being added to MachineSetStatus and its purpose for the scale subresource.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Stable And Deterministic Test Names	✅ Passed	PR contains no Ginkgo test code, only static type definition field additions. No test names introduced or modified.
Microshift Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	This pull request is not applicable to the MicroShift Test Compatibility check because it does not add any new Ginkgo e2e tests. The change is purely an API schema modification that adds a LabelSelector field to the MachineSetStatus type in the machine API.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	The custom check evaluates SNO compatibility for new Ginkgo e2e tests. This PR only adds an optional LabelSelector field to MachineSetStatus type with no new test code, making the check not applicable.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	PR adds only a LabelSelector field to MachineSetStatus struct with no scheduling constraints, pod affinity rules, or controller logic.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract	✅ Passed	This PR modifies only an API type definition file adding a field to MachineSetStatus struct. The OTE Binary Stdout Contract applies to test binaries and executable code, not pure type definitions.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	This PR adds a LabelSelector field to MachineSetStatus type, not Ginkgo e2e tests, so the check does not apply.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

RadekManak · 2026-04-16T10:22:39Z

/jira refresh

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-04-16T10:22:45Z

@RadekManak: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-82584, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (5.0.0) matches configured target version for branch (5.0.0)
bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

everettraven

/lgtm

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-04-17T12:42:33Z

Pipeline controller notification

No second-stage tests were triggered for this PR.

This can happen when:

The changed files don't match any pipeline_run_if_changed patterns
All files match pipeline_skip_if_only_changed patterns
No pipeline-controlled jobs are defined for the master branch

Use /test ? to see all available tests.

everettraven · 2026-04-17T12:44:28Z

@RadekManak Looks like there are some verify failures. Try a make update followed by a make verify locally to make sure all the generated changes are applied.

Give me a ping when that is done and I'll re-lgtm.

everettraven · 2026-04-20T13:19:20Z

/lgtm

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-04-20T13:24:50Z

Pipeline controller notification

No second-stage tests were triggered for this PR.

This can happen when:

The changed files don't match any pipeline_run_if_changed patterns
All files match pipeline_skip_if_only_changed patterns
No pipeline-controlled jobs are defined for the master branch

Use /test ? to see all available tests.

openshift-ci · 2026-04-20T13:25:57Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [everettraven]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

RadekManak · 2026-04-20T13:48:06Z

/verified by @RadekManak manual testing with openshift/machine-api-operator#1490

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-04-20T13:48:18Z

@RadekManak: This PR has been marked as verified by @RadekManak manual testing with https://github.com/openshift/machine-api-operator/pull/1490.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @RadekManak manual testing with openshift/machine-api-operator#1490

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci · 2026-04-20T15:13:08Z

@RadekManak: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-04-20T15:16:44Z

@RadekManak: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-82584: Some pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

The following pull request, linked via external tracker, has not merged:

openshift/machine-api-operator#1490 is open

All associated pull requests must be merged or unlinked from the Jira bug in order for it to move to the next state. Once unlinked, request a bug refresh with /jira refresh.

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-82584 has not been moved to the MODIFIED state.

This PR is marked as verified. If the remaining PRs listed above are marked as verified before merging, the issue will automatically be moved to VERIFIED after all of the changes from the PRs are available in an accepted nightly payload.

Details

In response to this:

Summary

MachineSet already advertises a scale subresource with labelSelectorPath: .status.labelSelector, but the API/schema does not define that status field.

adds status.labelSelector to machine.openshift.io/v1beta1 MachineSetStatus

The paired openshift/machine-api-operator#1490 change populates status.labelSelector from spec.selector during MachineSet status reconciliation so the /scale subresource can expose Scale.status.selector for HPA/KEDA-style consumers.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci-robot added jira/severity-moderate Referenced Jira bug's severity is moderate for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. labels Apr 16, 2026

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Apr 16, 2026

openshift-ci bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Apr 16, 2026

openshift-ci bot requested review from everettraven and mandre April 16, 2026 10:18

RadekManak mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2026

OCPBUGS-82584: Populate status label selector for scale subresource. openshift/machine-api-operator#1490

Open

openshift-ci-robot added jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Apr 16, 2026

RadekManak force-pushed the OCPBUGS-82584 branch from fae2c31 to ca2059a Compare April 16, 2026 12:43

everettraven reviewed Apr 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread machine/v1beta1/types_machineset.go

RadekManak force-pushed the OCPBUGS-82584 branch 4 times, most recently from 75901b6 to 53cb6e6 Compare April 17, 2026 07:48

everettraven approved these changes Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned everettraven Apr 17, 2026

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 17, 2026

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Apr 17, 2026

Add labelSelector to MachineSet status for scale subresource

b34d557

RadekManak force-pushed the OCPBUGS-82584 branch from 53cb6e6 to b34d557 Compare April 20, 2026 12:13

openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 20, 2026

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 20, 2026

openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Apr 20, 2026

openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 34e6087 into openshift:master Apr 20, 2026
16 checks passed

Conversation

RadekManak commented Apr 16, 2026

Summary

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot bot commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Apr 16, 2026

Summary

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Uh oh!

RadekManak commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot bot commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

everettraven commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

everettraven commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

RadekManak commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Apr 20, 2026

Summary

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading